ABSTRACT
Much has been written on the relation between paternalism and coercion. Philosophers have focused less on the relation between paternalism and manipulation. This chapter provides a brief overview of some philosophical work on manipulation and then develops an alternative account of manipulation. It then distinguishes between manipulation per se and paternalistic manipulation and in so doing argues that paternalism need not be coercive. Next, the essay discusses the work of Nomy Arpaly and Julia Markovits on moral worth and extends their views to normative worth more generally. The essay concludes with a discussion of what makes manipulated behavior defective, and this provides an explanation for what makes paternalistic manipulation wrong, when it is wrong.
